Falcons: Pass Rush

[Radical]

(11-15-2011 01:03 PM)keithbrooking56 Wrote:  Tackles are an arbitrary team assigned number. Sacks are actual events that took place that resulted in negative yards for the opposing team. If you don't think real stats "mean" anything then we have nothing else to say to each other on the topic.

So you've never seen an instance where someone knocked the QB off the spot, sent him scrambling, and then someone else cleaned up when he was already going to the ground for the stat?

Face it, not all sacks are the same, and there is simply too much inconsistency within the very assignment of the sack itself to even justify trying to use that as an indicator of success. Are you going to tell me that a guy with 10 sacks is better than the guy who had 7 sacks, but also 7 more pressures or hits that lead to a few interceptions or key 3rd down stops? How about a guy that records just 1 sack all game, but is invisible otherwise, compared to a guy that gets 5 pressures and 2 hits on the QB?

Sack is just a sliver of information that is almost miniscule when it comes to painting the whole picture of how a player is performing.

[Braskilla]

Stats are just some.numbers on a.piece of.paper.

[babuka]

Qb pressures as tracked by profootballfocus are a much better stat than sacks.

[keithbrooking56]

(11-15-2011 03:53 PM)Radical Wrote:  So you've never seen an instance where someone knocked the QB off the spot, sent him scrambling, and then someone else cleaned up when he was already going to the ground for the stat?

Face it, not all sacks are the same, and there is simply too much inconsistency within the very assignment of the sack itself to even justify trying to use that as an indicator of success. Are you going to tell me that a guy with 10 sacks is better than the guy who had 7 sacks, but also 7 more pressures or hits that lead to a few interceptions or key 3rd down stops? How about a guy that records just 1 sack all game, but is invisible otherwise, compared to a guy that gets 5 pressures and 2 hits on the QB?

Sack is just a sliver of information that is almost miniscule when it comes to painting the whole picture of how a player is performing.

I enjoy the strawman insertions in here. I never once said sacks were the end all, be all of player evaluation. I said that sacks as a stat do in fact "count". They matter both as an individual and a team stat. Teams and players that get consistent pressure on the opposing QB usually have some sacks to show for it. No QB ever gets sacked going by your argument and it mean nothing on the field.

You think this Falcons team is apparently causing enough pressure to not get hardly any sacks but somehow move the QB in the pocket or result in bad throws and turnovers. Simply and categorically not true. QBs sit in the pocket and pick our secondary apart due to the complete lack of pressure. The only saving points to our defense are the run defense (of course why run when you can throw) and the usual reliability of our defenders to make immediate tackles and not allow YAC.

But the greatest attribute of any defense, the ability to disrupt and stop an offense? We have none of that. NONE. I defy you or anyone else to look at game film from every game this year and come away with your conclusion of "boy look at those Falcons get after the QB every game!"

[Radical]

I say we have gotton after the QB more games than not this year.

I can say for sure about the Chicago, Eagles, Seattle, Carolina, Detroit, and Colts game that we were getting a sufficient amount of pressure on the QB.

[keithbrooking56]

(11-15-2011 06:09 PM)Radical Wrote:  I say we have gotton after the QB more games than not this year.

I can say for sure about the Chicago, Eagles, Seattle, Carolina, Detroit, and Colts game that we were getting a sufficient amount of pressure on the QB.

The only game on that list where we actually had pressure enough to last the entire game and it impact the opposing team was Chicago. If you think the rest of those games counts as sufficient pass pressure to satisfy you then we have two wildly different standards as to what constitutes pass pressure.

[NCFalconfan]

Anyone ever noticed back several years ago when we were one of the better pass rushing teams in the league, we were also one of the worst at stopping the run? I think our line has been taught to watch for the run first, or read and react rather than a pin your ears back and go after the QB defensive line. Granted, the rush on obvious 3rd downs last week wasn't up to snuff either, but don't too obsessed with sack stats. IMO, the sign of a good D-Line is if they can stonewall the run. The pass rush on obvious passing situations on 3rd downs could be better mind you , but I think that if everyone not named Weatherspoon on our LBing core would raise their game in pass defense, you'd see our defense vastly improve.

[IceAge02]

[quote='keithbrooking56' pid='80767' dateline='1321392707']

I enjoy the strawman insertions in here. I never once said sacks were the end all, be all of player evaluation. I said that sacks as a stat do in fact "count". They matter both as an individual and a team stat. Teams and players that get consistent pressure on the opposing QB usually have some sacks to show for it. No QB ever gets sacked going by your argument and it mean nothing on the field.

You think this Falcons team is apparently causing enough pressure to not get hardly any sacks but somehow move the QB in the pocket or result in bad throws and turnovers. Simply and categorically not true. QBs sit in the pocket and pick our secondary apart due to the complete lack of pressure. The only saving points to our defense are the run defense (of course why run when you can throw) and the usual reliability of our defenders to make immediate tackles and not allow YAC.

But the greatest attribute of any defense, the ability to disrupt and stop an offense? We have none of that. NONE. I defy you or anyone else to look at game film from every game this year and come away with your conclusion of "boy look at those Falcons get after the QB every game!"

[/quote

You say we have no pass rush yet we had Brees running around in the pocket making horrible throws. If you watched the game his receivers were making either great catches or BRees would get it out of his hands fast. This is what he always does which makes his oline play better wen they know the ball will be out in less then 2 seconds. And when he did hold onto the ball he always had happy feet moving around in the pocket. We might have not got a sack in the game but we did get some holding calls our way...in my view its almost the same as a sack just without loss of down.(and it caused them to miss a feild goal)

[keithbrooking56]

(11-16-2011 03:13 PM)IceAge02 Wrote:  [quote='keithbrooking56' pid='80767' dateline='1321392707']

I enjoy the strawman insertions in here. I never once said sacks were the end all, be all of player evaluation. I said that sacks as a stat do in fact "count". They matter both as an individual and a team stat. Teams and players that get consistent pressure on the opposing QB usually have some sacks to show for it. No QB ever gets sacked going by your argument and it mean nothing on the field.

You think this Falcons team is apparently causing enough pressure to not get hardly any sacks but somehow move the QB in the pocket or result in bad throws and turnovers. Simply and categorically not true. QBs sit in the pocket and pick our secondary apart due to the complete lack of pressure. The only saving points to our defense are the run defense (of course why run when you can throw) and the usual reliability of our defenders to make immediate tackles and not allow YAC.

But the greatest attribute of any defense, the ability to disrupt and stop an offense? We have none of that. NONE. I defy you or anyone else to look at game film from every game this year and come away with your conclusion of "boy look at those Falcons get after the QB every game!"

[/quote

You say we have no pass rush yet we had Brees running around in the pocket making horrible throws. If you watched the game his receivers were making either great catches or BRees would get it out of his hands fast. This is what he always does which makes his oline play better wen they know the ball will be out in less then 2 seconds. And when he did hold onto the ball he always had happy feet moving around in the pocket. We might have not got a sack in the game but we did get some holding calls our way...in my view its almost the same as a sack just without loss of down.(and it caused them to miss a feild goal)

I can't decide if this is a troll post or if someone actually thinks this. No one who watched that game including the announcers and the players afterwards came away saying "Man the Falcons were hammering Brees! He had to run for his life back there!". What actually happened is Brees sat back in the pocket with almost no rush whatsoever around him and picked the secondary apart at his leisure. The only time in the entire game I remember any actual pressure was when we actually had his knee down for a sack but the biased refs let the play go as an incomplete pass.

[Radical]

Yeah. I'm not even willing to say that Brees was facing pressure. Our front four simply didn't get the job done, at all.